tv [untitled] March 23, 2011 2:30am-3:00am PDT
hire requirements between our funding and that of the federal funding. that contract has not been awarded. >> that work was for --? >> that was for another muni community. that project is some 88 kilowatt on the smaller side. you're estimating that it would cost about a million dollars and three. it has not yet been awarded. i believe that the comment here is looking forward to modifications and what the rulings would be in respect to
the prevailing wage. when i was speaking earlier, when we issued to these, we had the conference and we take questions from the contractors. there were questions at the conference are around what the prevailing wage for the scope of work would be on this project. together with the city family, we rely on the workforce development and the office of labor standards. we responded that it was -- and electricians. this is a project where we would be using -- and not hard
panel's. the solar generations are bolted to the roofing materials. distillation of that membrane that would adhere to that. we were advised that we would have the roofers prevailing wage. then for the work involved in the lecture will components, it would be the electrician with the prevailing wage. >> if you deem that this is appropriate, i would like to ask the gentlemen from -- to come back up to the front. you have asked that we do what?
>> we were talking about the contract that she was speaking to. >> we will move forward with these two locations, whether or not they will voluntarily comply with the ordinance. you are not aware of any discussions taking place? >> as they are being bid, they will be in compliance with the higher ordinance. >> you're talking about the new muni pieces, not those that have been awarded.
>> that's correct. >> this is a separate issue. it seems that there has been conversations. you're concerned as around the prevailing wage issue. why why do you want to see these rebid? >> the community folks who have opportunities to work and these jobs sides, there is a difference between the sunset reservoir and the solar installations on the rooftops. when you make a determination that this is of a particular trade, you incorrectly cut a lot of people out of that work. that is what we are trying to get our arms around and i don't
>> i want to make sure that my colleagues understand. we are creating jobs. we are getting the job done. >> we are proceeding with the bid. we will be staying the course and publicly by this commission, letting them know that we appreciate their pollen terry efforts to comply and to do it even better than they have promised. are there any other public
comments? >> the next item is the consent calendar. i'm sorry, number eight, the general managers' report from the bay area water supply and conservation agency. >> you mentioned the world water day at the beginning of the meeting. they have a number of categories. our agency one in the government agency category. >> congratulations.
considering those that have been looking at the cost of that particular facility. it was well done and this is faced your staff. we have watched this very close to because we want to see you succeed. congratulations to you on that. if the case studies keep coming, which is the plan, i will be interested in listening to those. lastly, i noted that a comment about bald water, i am proud to
say my daughter is getting married. i will make sure that the open bar does not include bottled water. >> all matters listed consist the consent calendar and they're considered to be routine and will be acted upon by a single vote. a, except work approved by j flores inc. for water and a price, local water repair, and replacement.
b, except work performed by dl falk for water enterprise funded work, water supply to administration building tenant program. c, approve the plans and specifications and award water in a price system improvement program as needed integration services. d, approve modification number five to wastewater enterprise se water pollution control plant, mix liquor, return activated sludge, and headworks facilities odor control improvements. e, approve modification to the
waste water in a prize got to the waste water enterprise control plant, digester gas recirculation compressor replacement with cal state constructors to install a digester gas cooling system upstream of the compressors and ancillary control equipment. f, approved the plans and specifications and award wastewater enterprise, renewal, and replacement program funded contract to the lowest qualified responsive bidder. g, approve the plans and specifications and award was water enterprise, capital improvement program, spot sort
repair contract number 25. if any commissioner would like to move any items from the consent calendar? >> i would like to move the consent calendar. >> second. >> the next item. i intend to discussion of possible action to improve pedestrian lighting policy and authorize the general manager to implement it pedestrian lighting policy. -- item 10, discussion and possible action. >> what i have before you is a request to improve the pedestrian lighting policy and to have the general manager implement the policy.
as you know, power enterprise operates and maintains 75,000 lights in the city. we own about 25,000 of them. i have our project manager who oversees the work of our field staff. there has been historic ambiguity about who is responsible here in the city for pedestrian lighting. we have some pedestrian-scale lighting, so does recreation and parks. the city code provides that the public utilities commission will determine the intensity of elimination, number, and size of lighting.
the puc has been deemed to have responsibility. the ambiguity around pedestrian lighting has come to ahead for us. pedestrian lighting is expected to increase in the coming years as more attention is paid to the streetscape. with the treatment by dpw, the definition of streets also bears on responsibility for pedestrians lighting. sometimes pictures help. here is a photo that shows
rincon hill area. you can see a street light and to the left, a pedestrian light. this is an example of pedestrian lighting that was installed by the developer for and improve to the area. -- and then prove to the area. this is another light that is pedestrian scale. you can see the top of the light. this is a redevelopment- sponsored project.
then we will have the lighting that gives you an example of the pedestrian scale lighting we are talking about. many of these projects are proposed by developers working with the city. the better street plan adoption means that any doctor who will rebuild a block or a number of blocks will be obligated to install pedestrian lighting. once the plan is in place to install it, who reviews the plan. who expects the work after it has installed. under the proposed pedestrian
policy you have, we are suggesting that for whites that are located along the street as is currently defined by the public's works code, when it is poll-mounted, when they have been selected from a pre- determined portfolio of fixtures, when they have been installed to meet the standards for conduit boxes that we have, when the plans and designs have been reviewed and approved by us and inspected and approved in the field after they have been installed, they would take responsibility for ongoing maintenance if this is adopted. we would only assume responsibility for whites -- lights that have 40 been installed.
when they are poll-mounted, when the current into t provides us with specifications as to where they are located, a condition assessment, the manufacturers catalog number for the fixtures, we know what it is they're asking us to take on. we would have information adequate to consider assuming responsibility for those as well. this would not be guaranteed an opportunity to consider. we recognize that this policy would place a financial burden on us to operate and maintain them appropriately. if the city decides to make street improvements and not a separate developer, to than have
the capacity to put in the pedestrian lighting and necessary conduits. to give you a sense of what that could cost, we look at a hypothetical street, 5 miles. if there was a major street like mission that the city decided that there is lighting installed, but there is a cost and assessment for you included in your packet. this would run about 16.8 million, both sides of the street. for the conduit and boxes,
another 2.4 million bringing the total estimate up to 19 million. historically, the city has taken upon itself to install about 33 lights a year. perhaps a more realistic sense of what it would cost is shown on this chart. we're 37 lights are installed with conduits, it would cost us about 550,000. over 20 years, 37 lights a year, that gets us up to 12.9 million.
if you would assume, some and not a pedestrian lighting funded by the city as opposed to buy developer, you have to remember that a financial burden would be the operations and maintenance of those lights that are handed over to us said that we install. if we have a right up of what it would cost. $93 a light if this is a standard light, $39 if this is a highly efficient light. a total over 20 years shown their which is substantially less when it is an alley the light. -- when it is an led light.
two of the examples i showed you have pedestrian writing styles are lights that were installed that have not been turned by the developers. this is part of the reason that gets us to the podium today is that the developers are trying to hand the street lights off and the redevelopment agency is trying to hand the pedestrian writing off. they're asking us to assume responsibility for those.
there are other projects in developing queue. the department of public works is looking to us to become the owner. i'm happy to take any questions. >> why do they cost more than lead to maintain --led to maintain? >> standard lights consume more electricity, they burn out at a faster rate. this requires us to send a crew out and take the lead out and
change it. all of the labor cost is built into the laborers -- into numbers you have seen. >> why are we doing this? >> if you think that we should be responsible for the lights, we will include requirements for them to be a fixture is available in the marketplace. >> before us today is really policy? >> this is a policy for pedestrian writing which is newly installed >> i am assuming that developers are the ones installing the lights.
>> typically that is true. it does taken upon itself to improve the streets, separate and apart from what the developers are doing. the project will provoke a better streets. this will present an issue of what about pedestrian lighting. >> the budget we had was for street lights and not for production. >> it seems to me that these lights are not necessary. they just make a st. look better. we are looking at that and the
times we are in right now. >> my first reaction was why should we take this on. the first time it came out to me was during the jazz festival. these were installed by the redevelopment agency. whether they exist or not, they're going out of business. the people that are there are planning on maintaining them. we have lights on our streets that will simply go out. the charter has said that we have these utilities and street lights. people are looking to us saying, you have to take these lights on. no, there are no other entities in the city that have the capacity to do it. one option would be to say you
can have pedestrian lighting in the city and see if we can make that point. absent that, we probably will -- make sure they are the right lights. these are guys that can be a corporate so that people can get this responsibility. i really did ask if we could just say no. so far, i have not gotten a good answer as to what happens to lights that are already out there and existing. we also have a major policy in the city to do the implementation and you will not have the developers doing this. it is the city putting in different sidewalks, trees, everything, and they will want to put in pedestrian lighting.